# Why do people get upset when new DNA tests frees someone from prison?
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-get-upset-when-new-dna-tests-frees-someone-from-prison/648860
**Category:** In My Humble Opinion
**Created:** [January 31, 2013, 1:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-get-upset-when-new-dna-tests-frees-someone-from-prison/648860 "2013-01-31T01:06:39Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@aceplace57](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aceplace57)
#### Post date: [January 31, 2013, 1:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-get-upset-when-new-dna-tests-frees-someone-from-prison/648860/1 "2013-01-31T01:06:39Z")
I’m having trouble understanding why people get upset when new DNA tests frees someone. The wording of these statements troubles me. This guy was a former cop that lost 14 years in prison. You’d think his former colleagues would be happy for him. This guy was a respected and trusted member of the community before his wife’s death.
I’d be less thrilled if a lifetime criminal got released. But even in cases like that I respect the science behind DNA testing. _If the DNA don’t fit you gotta acquit._ The gang banger may have killed other people, but he didn’t kill the one he’s locked up for.
People gladly throw people in jail based on DNA. Why the reluctance to correct a mistake made in a trial years ago?
The bite mark was a critical part of the evidence. DNA proves that this guy didn’t make that bite mark.
> **[Police captain exonerated in wife’s murder, freed from prison | CNN](https://www.cnn.com/2013/01/29/justice/ohio-police-captain-exonerated/index.html?hpt=hp_t2)**
>
> A former Akron, Ohio, police captain who was convicted of murdering his wife in 1997 has been cleared of the crime and released after more than 14 years in prison.
> [@](#):
>
> A former Akron, Ohio, police captain who was convicted of murdering his wife in 1997, has been cleared of the crime and released after more than 14 years in prison.
>
> Douglas Prade walked out of the Madison Correctional Institution around 4:30 p.m. Tuesday, CNN affiliate WOIO reported, a few hours after Summit County Common Pleas Judge Judy Hunter ruled he was innocent of the crime and ordered him released. County officials said they will appeal the decision.
> [@](#):
>
> “This is a gross misapplication of the law, and we will be appealing Prade’s exoneration,” county Prosecutor Sherri Bevan Walsh said in a news release.
>
> “All of the evidence clearly points to Prade as Dr. Margo Prade’s killer,” Akron Police Chief James Nice said in the same release. “He was proven guilty in front of a jury using a substantial amount of other evidence.”
> [@](#):
>
> though DNA tests conducted at the time were inconclusive, the main evidence against the captain was a bite mark on the victim’s arm and lab coat that a prosecution expert matched to her husband’s teeth. No weapon was found and prosecutors produced no one who witnessed the killing.
---
### Author:  [@RealityChuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RealityChuck)
#### Post date: [January 31, 2013, 1:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-get-upset-when-new-dna-tests-frees-someone-from-prison/648860/2 "2013-01-31T01:08:39Z")
Prosecutors and police on a case are always very reluctant to admit they made a mistake.
---
### Author:  [@Altivu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Altivu)
#### Post date: [January 31, 2013, 1:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-get-upset-when-new-dna-tests-frees-someone-from-prison/648860/3 "2013-01-31T01:11:07Z")
Emotional investment? People are generally content if someone is indicted for a crime, regardless of who it is.
And obviously tangible evidence is a lot more conclusive then the new-fangled science shmience stuff they’re pulling out of their asses just to protect the criminals :rolleyes:
---
### Author:  [@Musicat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Musicat)
#### Post date: [January 31, 2013, 1:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-get-upset-when-new-dna-tests-frees-someone-from-prison/648860/4 "2013-01-31T01:11:54Z")
[All things are moleeds,](http://www.ted.com/talks/charles_fleischer_insists_all_things_are_moleeds.html)by Charles Fleischer.
---
### Author:  [@samclem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/samclem)
#### Post date: [January 31, 2013, 1:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-get-upset-when-new-dna-tests-frees-someone-from-prison/648860/5 "2013-01-31T01:16:16Z")
The case in the OP is here in my Akron.
It’s probably not the best case to use.
He may still be guilty. His DNA might not have been in the bite mark.
I’m still 50/50 as to whether there will be a conviction in a retrial.
---
### Author:  [@Musicat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Musicat)
#### Post date: [January 31, 2013, 1:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-get-upset-when-new-dna-tests-frees-someone-from-prison/648860/6 "2013-01-31T01:31:38Z")
> [@Musicat](#):
>
> [All things are moleeds,](http://www.ted.com/talks/charles_fleischer_insists_all_things_are_moleeds.html)by Charles Fleischer.
Sorry, posted in wrong thread. Please ignore.
---
### Author:  [@ZenBeam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ZenBeam)
#### Post date: [January 31, 2013, 1:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-get-upset-when-new-dna-tests-frees-someone-from-prison/648860/7 "2013-01-31T01:33:49Z")
> [@samclem](#):
>
> The case in the OP is here in my Akron.
Do you know what other evidence there was? The CNN article only mentions the bite mark, and “substantial amount of other evidence” with no other description. I’m not very trusting of bite mark identification, myself.
---
### Author:  [@aceplace57](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aceplace57)
#### Post date: [January 31, 2013, 1:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-get-upset-when-new-dna-tests-frees-someone-from-prison/648860/8 "2013-01-31T01:41:19Z")
Ironically bite mark analysis was presented in the trial. The accuracy of bite mark id has been questioned for awhile. Now, they discover this guys DNA wasn’t in the wound.
The prosecutor will have a tough time convincing a jury that someone else bit the victim and the accused shot her. It’s the state’s right to retry the case, but it may be a waste of money.
Heck some states have passed laws limiting new DNA testing. It’s like justice doesn’t matter. They want to keep people locked up no matter what.
---
### Author:  [@Ambivalid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ambivalid)
#### Post date: [January 31, 2013, 1:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-get-upset-when-new-dna-tests-frees-someone-from-prison/648860/9 "2013-01-31T01:45:37Z")
> [@aceplace57](#):
>
> Heck some states have passed laws limiting new DNA testing.
What states? And what is their justification for such laws?
---
### Author:  [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)
#### Post date: [January 31, 2013, 1:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-get-upset-when-new-dna-tests-frees-someone-from-prison/648860/10 "2013-01-31T01:52:09Z")
> [@aceplace57](#):
>
> Heck some states have passed laws limiting new DNA testing. It’s like justice doesn’t matter. They want to keep people locked up no matter what.
This reminds me of perhaps the stupidest thing I can recall a “smart” person saying. Said person was a legal scholar of some sort. The topic of discusion was “lie detectors”. Now, in real life there is no doubt “lie detectors” have some serious issues, even if one assumes they are way more reliable than current evidence seems to indicate.
Said person was against lie detectors period. Even if they were 100 percent accurate. And not because of some sophisticated legal/ethical/gotcha/catch 22 reason.
They were against them because using them would “undermine the jury process”
Jesus Christ on a cracker.
---
### Author:  [@aceplace57](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aceplace57)
#### Post date: [January 31, 2013, 1:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-get-upset-when-new-dna-tests-frees-someone-from-prison/648860/11 "2013-01-31T01:54:18Z")
My google fu is letting me down. I have read about states limiting DNA retesting on old cases. It’s even gone to the Supreme Court.
Maybe someone else can find a list of states with restrictions?
[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/18/AR2009061801610.html](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/18/AR2009061801610.html)
> [@](#):
>
> Prisoners do not have a constitutional right to DNA testing after their conviction, the Supreme Court ruled yesterday, even though the technology provides an “unparalleled ability both to exonerate the wrongly convicted and to identify the guilty.”
>
> In the court’s first examination of how to treat the rapidly evolving field of biological testing, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote for a majority that said it is up to the states and Congress to decide who has a right to testing that might prove innocence long after conviction.
> ad\_icon
>
> The “challenges DNA technology poses to our criminal justice systems and our traditional notions of finality” are better left to elected officials than federal judges, Roberts wrote for the majority in a 5 to 4 decision.
> [@](#):
>
> For instance, Kentucky allows testing only for those on death row, not those sentenced to life imprisonment, Neufeld said. Other states withhold testing for those who have pleaded guilty, although Neufeld said 20 percent of those who have been exonerated by DNA testing had given up their assertions of innocence for strategic or other reasons.
---
### Author:  [@samclem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/samclem)
#### Post date: [January 31, 2013, 2:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-get-upset-when-new-dna-tests-frees-someone-from-prison/648860/12 "2013-01-31T02:43:57Z")
> [@ZenBeam](#):
>
> Do you know what other evidence there was? The CNN article only mentions the bite mark, and “substantial amount of other evidence” with no other description. I’m not very trusting of bite mark identification, myself.
[http://www.ohio.com/news/1998-trial-coverage-evidence-overwhelms-doubt-jurors-mostly-mum-about-deliberations-but-prosecution-uses-circumstantial-case-to-convict-ex-akron-police-capt-douglas-prade-one-says-bite-mark-sealed-it-1.368884](http://www.ohio.com/news/1998-trial-coverage-evidence-overwhelms-doubt-jurors-mostly-mum-about-deliberations-but-prosecution-uses-circumstantial-case-to-convict-ex-akron-police-capt-douglas-prade-one-says-bite-mark-sealed-it-1.368884)
---
### Author:  [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)
#### Post date: [January 31, 2013, 2:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-get-upset-when-new-dna-tests-frees-someone-from-prison/648860/13 "2013-01-31T02:54:30Z")
People shouldn’t use DNA testing as some magic talisman that divines the truth. Rather, that’s what a trial is for–both sides get to present all their best evidence and cross-examine the other side, and then the jury decides, and that’s the truth. It ain’t perfect, but it’s better than a lot of other ways of doing it. I can see how people could get upset when that whole process gets de-railed years later just because of some DNA evidence and arguments from doe-eyed undergraduates or law students (i.e., the Innocence Project).
For example, in the case discussed in the OP, all we have now is that DNA evidence shows this guy didn’t bite the victim’s arm. That doesn’t mean he didn’t kill her. There must be more going on here than the article discusses–I don’t see how a judge could simply say “oh, he wasn’t the biter? Then he wasn’t the shooter–release him.”
---
### Author:  [@aceplace57](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aceplace57)
#### Post date: [January 31, 2013, 5:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-get-upset-when-new-dna-tests-frees-someone-from-prison/648860/14 "2013-01-31T05:42:40Z")
It depends on the crime. Rape is pretty much you did it or didn’t do it. If the collected samples point to another person then its pretty conclusive you didn’t deposit the sample.
Murders are more tricky. I can see circumstances where someone could shoot and not leave any of their own DNA. Clean themselves up, burn their clothes and shoes then with luck the victim’s dna won’t be on them. Forensic Science is making that harder and harder to pull off.
Apparently the ex-cop didn’t leave any dna on the victim. You’d expect to find dna in that bite wound. I guess a new jury will soon decide.
I wish the reporting was better. I’m curious whether they got an identifiable dna sequence. If they did then that points to a new suspect. Finding him and getting a match could be hard, but they won’t even try if the cops & DA are focused on retrying the ex-cop.
---
### Author:  [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)
#### Post date: [January 31, 2013, 5:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-get-upset-when-new-dna-tests-frees-someone-from-prison/648860/15 "2013-01-31T05:47:38Z")
> [@aceplace57](#):
>
> It depends on the crime. Rape is pretty much you did it or didn’t do it. If the collected samples point to another person then its pretty conclusive you didn’t deposit the sample.
>
> Murders are more tricky. I can see circumstances where someone could shoot and not leave any of their own DNA. Clean themselves up, burn their clothes and shoes then with luck the victim’s dna won’t be on them. Forensic Science is making that harder and harder to pull off.
>
> Apparently the ex-cop didn’t leave any dna on the victim. You’d expect to find dna in that bite wound. I guess a new jury will soon decide.
>
> I wish the reporting was better. I’m curious whether they got an identifiable dna sequence. If they did then that points to a new suspect. Finding him and getting a match could be hard, but they won’t even try if the cops & DA are focused on retrying the ex-cop.
Please never sit on any jury.
---
### Author:  [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)
#### Post date: [January 31, 2013, 5:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-get-upset-when-new-dna-tests-frees-someone-from-prison/648860/16 "2013-01-31T05:58:15Z")
It’s also disturbing to know that, if they did get the wrong person, the actual killer is still out there. And that’s scary. Not that that makes it okay, but it’s probably on peoples’ minds.
---
### Author:  [@DataX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DataX)
#### Post date: [January 31, 2013, 5:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-get-upset-when-new-dna-tests-frees-someone-from-prison/648860/17 "2013-01-31T05:59:20Z")
If there was someone elses DNA in the bite mark - and the bite mark was substantially used to convict him - then there shouldn’t be an issue - he should go free. If there was no DNA detected - well that shouldn’t make a difference - obviously someone bit her - and someone was convicted for that crime.
I don’t tend to think there really is that much outrage. If anything I think I hear more outrage directed against the system than anything else. Most normal people know the system makes mistakes - and these cases are shedding light on the abuses in the system and how crappy stuff like eyewitness testimony can be.
I was taking a class (right at the start of these line of cases a long time ago) in criminal justice - taught by a former prosecutor. One of these cases was in the news and a prosecutor said something like “we still think he’s guilty”. I asked our teacher why he said this - based on what appeared to be pretty convincing new evidence. His answer was simply “well what did you expect him to say”.
So (as someone else pointed out) it appears to me that some people - no matter what training they have had - still have a hard time admitting they were wrong.
---
### Author:  [@Hari\_Seldon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hari_Seldon)
#### Post date: [January 31, 2013, 1:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-get-upset-when-new-dna-tests-frees-someone-from-prison/648860/18 "2013-01-31T13:29:04Z")
Some years the AG of Florida was representing the state against an apparently innocent man who had been convicted of rape/murder and the DNA evidence that was later examined showed it was not his DNA. The AG argued that the good citizens of Florida had determined that this guy should be executed and even if he was shown “absolute proof of innocence” (I think they were his exact words), it was his job to see the man executed and he would fight in court to do so.
There seems to be a belief in some legal circles that a verdict and sentence are like decrees from god and not to be questioned.
---
### Author:  [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)
#### Post date: [January 31, 2013, 1:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-get-upset-when-new-dna-tests-frees-someone-from-prison/648860/19 "2013-01-31T13:51:43Z")
Perhaps some people are upset\* about this ruling because they’re convinced on other grounds that Prade was guilty. The trial news link posted earlier shows that he was a stalker who entered the victim’s home and made death threats against her:
"Douglas Prade responded with verbal abuse, calling Margo Prade a “fat bitch,” and making threats against her.
“I can do away with you and nobody will know,” he said. “I’ve got something for your ass,” he said on another occasion."
It doesn’t sound to me like the DNA evidence points to anyone else, but that it doesn’t match the ex-husband. I was under the impression that you could not 100% conclusively determine that a bite mark matches someone’s teeth, so there was likely prosecutorial overreach on that point. Little choice but to free someone who likely was guilty in the first place.
\*What puzzles me are people who get upset about DNA evidence being used to match suspects to crimes and who wave their hands about “lab errors”, but are perfectly satisfied with the science when it exonerates someone. :dubious:
---
### Author:  [@aruvqan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aruvqan)
#### Post date: [January 31, 2013, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-get-upset-when-new-dna-tests-frees-someone-from-prison/648860/20 "2013-01-31T17:35:38Z")
> [@Jackmannii](#):
>
> Perhaps some people are upset\* about this ruling because they’re convinced on other grounds that Prade was guilty. The trial news link posted earlier shows that he was a stalker who entered the victim’s home and made death threats against her:
>
> "Douglas Prade responded with verbal abuse, calling Margo Prade a “fat bitch,” and making threats against her.
>
> “I can do away with you and nobody will know,” he said. “I’ve got something for your ass,” he said on another occasion."
>
> It doesn’t sound to me like the DNA evidence points to anyone else, but that it doesn’t match the ex-husband. I was under the impression that you could not 100% conclusively determine that a bite mark matches someone’s teeth, so there was likely prosecutorial overreach on that point. Little choice but to free someone who likely was guilty in the first place.
>
> \*What puzzles me are people who get upset about DNA evidence being used to match suspects to crimes and who wave their hands about “lab errors”, but are perfectly satisfied with the science when it exonerates someone. :dubious:
All well and good, so he was a stalker and threatened her. It is not outside of the realm of possibility that someone else capped her, IMHO. I got in a bar fight after leaving my asshole abusive fiancee[the one that threw me across a room hard enough to concuss me] so I could have died as a result of the fight, or in absence of the fight brought home a ‘Mr Goodbar’ and been killed with my ex as the ‘only possible person who had motive to kill me, and could have convinced me to let him in to my new flat with the bait of a reconciliation’ plunking the jerk in jail and letting my actual killer go free to kill again.
Just because someone has a stalker does not mean that they are unable to be killed by someone else.
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-people-get-upset-when-new-dna-tests-frees-someone-from-prison/648860.md?page=2)